Article Sidebar

Download
Statistic
Read Counter : 0

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

Cyberbullying remains an important concern in digitally mediated university learning, particularly in EFL contexts where students must negotiate linguistic meaning, interpersonal sensitivity, and responsible online communication simultaneously. However, research has given comparatively limited attention to the psychosocial and digital competencies associated with students' constructive responses to cyberbullying. This study examined the relationships of empathy, emotional regulation, and digital literacy with cyberbullying mitigation behavior among EFL university students. Employing a quantitative cross-sectional correlational design, the study involved 327 English Department students at Universitas Lancang Kuning, Indonesia. Data were collected through a five-point Likert-scale questionnaire measuring the four study constructs and were analyzed using descriptive statistics, Pearson Product-Moment correlation, and multiple linear regression. The findings showed that empathy, emotional regulation, and digital literacy were positively associated with cyberbullying mitigation behavior. Empathy emerged as the most prominent correlate, followed by digital literacy and emotional regulation. Collectively, the findings indicate that constructive responses to cyberbullying are closely associated with students' emotional sensitivity, capacity to manage reactions during online interaction, and ability to participate ethically and responsibly in digital environments. The study extends existing cyberbullying research by shifting attention from perpetration and victimization toward the competencies associated with supportive, non-retaliatory, and constructive responses in university-level EFL communication. These findings highlight the relevance of integrating empathy, emotional self-regulation, digital ethics, and responsible online communication into EFL learning practices and institutional cyberbullying-prevention initiatives


 


 

Keywords

Cyberbullying Online Learning Environments Psychosocial Competence Empathy Emotional Regulation Digital Literacy Cyberpsychology in Education

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Author Biographies

Budianto Hamuddin, Universitas Lancang Kuning, Pekanbaru, Indonesia

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Budianto Hamuddin, MESL. is a Senior Lecturer in the English Department at the Faculty of Education and Vocation, Universitas Lancang Kuning (UNILAK) in Pekanbaru, Indonesia. He holds a Master’s degree from Universiti Malaya, Malaysia, and a Doctorate in Linguistics from Universitas Hasanuddin, Indonesia. In addition to his teaching responsibilities, Dr. Hamuddin is the former Head of the Research Department at LPPM UNILAK and is an active editorial board member for several SINTA-accredited academic journals. His primary research interests lie in the fields of Applied Linguistics, English Language Studies, and Internet Linguistics, with notable publications focusing on cyberbullying in academic settings, digital discourse analysis, and the integration of technology in language learning.

Meutya Rizki Ramadhani, Universitas Lancang Kuning, Pekanbaru, Indonesia

Meutya Rizki Ramadhani is an academic at Universitas Lancang Kuning (UNILAK) in Pekanbaru, Indonesia, where she serves as a Research Assistant at the Institute for Research and Community Service (LPPM).  She actively contributes to academic publishing as the Assistant Editor of the Elsya: Journal of English Language Studies. Her primary research interests include applied linguistics, gamification in education, and innovative teaching methodologies, with a particular focus on English language learning and modern pedagogical approaches in Asian educational contexts.

Peby Tri Hartati , Universitas Lancang Kuning, Pekanbaru, Indonesia

Peby Tri Hartati, M.Pd. is a lecturer and researcher at Universitas Lancang Kuning (UNILAK) in Pekanbaru, Indonesia, specializing in the Department of Special Education. Her academic work is deeply rooted in inclusive education and the development of assistive technologies for children with special needs. She has earned recognition for her innovative research into educational gamification, notably through the creation of Android-based tools like GEMMAS to support literacy in children with intellectual disabilities, as well as her studies on orientation and mobility for the visually impaired. A published author of specialized pedagogical guides, she remains actively involved in community service projects that empower educators and parents with interactive learning strategies to foster cognitive development in special education settings.

Yogo Turnandes

Yogo Turnandes, M.Kom., MTA is a lecturer and technology researcher at the Faculty of Computer Science, Universitas Lancang Kuning (UNILAK) in Pekanbaru, Indonesia, where he is primarily affiliated with the Digital Business program. With a strong background in Information Technology and Data Science, his research focuses on the practical application of digital tools to solve organizational and educational challenges, ranging from developing web-based management systems for university admissions and thesis examinations to utilizing the Monte Carlo method for library visitor predictions. Beyond software development and programming, he is actively involved in community service and educational innovation, specifically exploring the role of gadgets as assistive learning tools for children with ADHD in inclusive schools and training educators on integrating AI tools like ChatGPT into interactive learning. Dr. Turnandes also contributes to the field of digital marketing and social media analytics, frequently publishing work on sentiment analysis and engagement strategies to enhance institutional and small-business performance in the digital era.

References

  1. Aoyama, I., & Talbert, T. L. (2010). Cyberbullying internationally increasing: New challenges in the technology generation. In S. R. Jimerson, S. M. Swearer, & D. L. Espelage (Eds.), Handbook of bullying in schools: An international perspective (pp. 185–195). Routledge.
  2. Arafah, B., & Hasyim, M. (2019). Linguistic functions of emoji in social media communication. Opcion, 35(24), 558–574.
  3. Bryce, J., & Fraser, J. (2013). “It’s common sense that it’s wrong”: Young people’s perceptions and experiences of cyberbullying. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 16(11), 783–787. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2012.0273
  4. Campbell, M. A. (2005). Cyber bullying: An old problem in a new guise? Australian Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 15(1), 68–76. https://doi.org/10.1375/ajgc.15.1.68
  5. Cassidy, W., Faucher, C., & Jackson, M. (2013). Cyberbullying among youth: A comprehensive review of current international research and its implications and application to policy and practice. School Psychology International, 34(6), 575–612. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034313479697
  6. Cheng, L., Li, J., Silva, Y. N., Hall, D., & Liu, H. (2019). XBully: Cyberbullying detection within a multi-modal context. Proceedings of the Twelfth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining, 339–347. https://doi.org/10.1145/3289600.3291037
  7. Dinakar, K., Reichart, R., & Lieberman, H. (2011). Modeling the detection of textual cyberbullying. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, 5(1), 11–17. https://doi.org/10.1609/icwsm.v5i1.14115
  8. Doane, A. N., Pearson, M. R., & Kelley, M. L. (2014). Predictors of cyberbullying perpetration among college students: An application of the Theory of Reasoned Action. Computers in Human Behavior, 36, 154–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.051
  9. Dresner, E., & Herring, S. C. (2010). Functions of the nonverbal in CMC: Emoticons and illocutionary force. Communication Theory, 20(3), 249–268. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2010.01362.x
  10. Englander, E., Donnerstein, E., Kowalski, R., Lin, C. A., & Parti, K. (2017). Defining cyberbullying. Pediatrics, 140(Supplement_2), S148–S151. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2016-1758U
  11. Gahagan, K., Vaterlaus, J. M., & Frost, L. R. (2016). College student cyberbullying on social networking sites: Conceptualization, prevalence, and perceived bystander responsibility. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 1097–1105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.019
  12. Gámez-Guadix, M., Orue, I., Smith, P. K., & Calvete, E. (2013). Longitudinal and reciprocal relations of cyberbullying with depression, substance use, and problematic internet use among adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Health, 53(4), 446–452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.03.030
  13. Gianesini, G., & Brighi, A. (2015). Cyberbullying in the era of digital relationships: The unique role of resilience and emotion regulation on adolescents’ adjustment. In A. Guarini & S. Brighi (Eds.), Cyberbullying across the globe (pp. 1–46). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25552-1_1
  14. Graves, K. N. (2013). Cyberbullying in higher education: A literature review. The Journal of Educational Research and Practice, 3(1), 15–27. https://doi.org/10.5590/JERAP.2013.03.1.02
  15. Hamuddin, B. (2023). Cyberbullying among EFL university students in Indonesia [Doctoral dissertation]. Universitas Lancang Kuning.
  16. Jibril, T. A., & Abdullah, M. H. T. (2013). Relevance of emoticons in computer-mediated communication contexts: An overview. Asian Social Science, 9(4), 201–207. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v9n4p201
  17. Koehler, C., & Weber, M. (2018). Cyberbullying among college students: Examining the impact of social media and online communication. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 27(8), 829–845. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926771.2017.1422843
  18. Kokkinos, C. M., Baltzidis, E., & Xynogala, D. (2014). Prevalence and personality correlates of Facebook bullying among university undergraduates. Computers in Human Behavior, 33, 168–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.01.007
  19. Kokkinos, C. M., & Antoniadou, N. (2019). Cyber-bullying and cyber-victimization among undergraduate student teachers through the lens of the General Aggression Model. Computers in Human Behavior, 98, 59–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.04.007
  20. Kota, R., & Moreno, M. A. (2013). Cyberbullying among college students. Journal of Adolescent Health, 53(1), 21–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.04.007
  21. Kwon, K. H., & Gruzd, A. (2017). Is offensive commenting contagious online? Examining public vs interpersonal swearing in response to Donald Trump’s YouTube campaign videos. Internet Research, 27(4), 991–1010. https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-12-2016-0364
  22. Leung, A. N. M., Wong, N., & Farver, J. M. (2019). You are what you read: The belief systems of cyber-bystanders on social networking sites. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 365. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00365
  23. Mann, C. (2009). Defining and understanding cyberbullying. Social Work Today, 9(1), 10–13.
  24. Marx, G. T. (2014). Toward a multidimensional conceptualization of the phenomenon of cyberbullying. New Media & Society, 16(5), 821–837. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813495164
  25. McKillop, A. M. (2014). Cyberbullying and the college student: Recommendations for campus intervention and policy. College Student Journal, 48(2), 279–290.
  26. Mehrabian, A. (1971). Silent messages. Wadsworth.
  27. Moses, R. A. (2013). Cyberbullying among college students: A descriptive study. Journal of Social Sciences, 9(3), 117–123. https://doi.org/10.3844/jssp.2013.117.123
  28. Patchin, J. W., & Hinduja, S. (2010). Cyberbullying and self-esteem. Journal of School Health, 80(12), 614–621. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2010.00548.x
  29. Raisi, E., & Huang, B. (2018). Cyberbullying detection with weakly supervised machine learning. Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining, 409–416. https://doi.org/10.1109/ASONAM.2018.8508249
  30. Reynolds, K., Kontostathis, A., & Edwards, L. (2011). Using machine learning to detect cyberbullying. 2011 10th International Conference on Machine Learning and Applications and Workshops, 241–244. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICMLA.2011.152
  31. Schenk, A. M., Fremouw, W. J., & Keelan, C. M. (2013). Characteristics of college cyberbullies. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(6), 2320–2327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.05.013
  32. Steffgen, G., König, A., Pfetsch, J., & Melzer, A. (2011). Are cyberbullies less empathic? Adolescents’ cyberbullying behavior and empathic responsiveness. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14(11), 643–648. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2010.0445
  33. Vandebosch, H., & Van Cleemput, K. (2009). Cyberbullying among youngsters: Profiles of bullies and victims. New Media & Society, 11(8), 1349–1371. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444809341263
  34. Varjas, K., Henrich, C. C., & Meyers, J. (2010). Urban middle school students’ perceptions of bullying, cyberbullying, and school safety. Journal of School Violence, 9(2), 159–176. https://doi.org/10.1080/15388220903479603
  35. Yang, S. J., & Grinshteyn, E. (2016). Safer cyberspace through legal intervention: A comparative review of cyberbullying legislation. World Medical & Health Policy, 8(4), 458–477. https://doi.org/10.1002/wmh3.209